When creative becomes coercive

Arts professionals have an understanding of certain types of behaviour often referred to as denoting ‘artistic temperament’. In our collective history, ‘creative genius’ is lauded: there are great artists, who often live and work outside the ordinary milieu. Rightly, we respect creativity – but do we also accept maverick behaviour, as long as it yields great art? Is artistic temperament merely a euphemism for bullying? This is an important question in the context of the findings that two in five survey respondents – employees in theatres and arts centres in the UK – have reported being the target of a bully at work.¹ It is especially so because this is a higher percentage than has been recorded in any other single sector – including the armed forces, prisons, the health service, the church and higher education. Could our tolerance of ordinarily unacceptable behaviour, when this is perpetrated by a creative person, be to blame? Do we permit artistic temperament when it is seen to be for the greater good: the show must go on?

The arts environments in which we work are more toxic than we like to think. Bullying is a set or series of behaviours, recurring regularly, which results in one person or body intimidating and oppressing another. The Dignity at Work Act 1997 describes bullying as:

• behaviour on more than one occasion which is offensive, abusive, malicious, insulting or intimidating
• unjustified criticism on more than one occasion
• punishment imposed without reasonable justification, or
• changes in the duties or responsibilities of the employee to the employee’s detriment without reasonable justification.

Arts employees have reported behaviour such as persistent, unwanted jokes or remarks, direct insults in front of colleagues, shouting or abusive behaviour, bad language and exclusion. In some cases, management has been identified as guilty of ‘corporate bullying’ by imposing terms and conditions viewed as unfair by employees.

The problem is often covert: a bully persistently and relentlessly intimidates a colleague, whilst simultaneously appearing to be a reasonable, pleasant individual when dealing with superiors. In these cases, the target of the bullying often faces a long, unpleasant journey to achieve a cessation of the behaviour – if indeed they succeed at all, other than by removing themselves from the situation. Bullying can turn competent, capable people into vulnerable, highly stressed employees in a matter of weeks or months. Usually bullies are, at some level, inadequate individuals who focus on, and are jealous of, popular colleagues who are good at their jobs.

Rogue manager

In a large-scale arts organisation a newly appointed fundraising manager quickly ingratiated himself with the ‘powerful’ people. Fellow middle-managers, and others deemed unimportant, were then subjected to a campaign of abusive behaviour, including demeaning personal remarks in public and repeated crude jokes about physical appearance – frequently reducing younger female employees in particular to tears. The manager regularly ridiculed a number of colleagues, usually behind their backs, except when he was in the presence of a superior who, of course, believed he was a model employee. Sadly, the employer ignored the employees’ complaints of bullying. The workplace became increasingly unhappy. As a direct result, one manager became seriously ill and took long-term sick leave. Others, especially junior employees, left the organisation. Management remained indifferent to complaints.

When this bullying manager left for a new job in another national organisation, the board of trustees paid public tribute to him. After he left, however, it was discovered that he had damaged the self-esteem and morale of a large number of people and that there was a very substantial hole in the ‘funds’ he had supposedly brought in. The organisation suffered a serious downturn as a result.

Board bullies

In a middle-scale arts trust, two board members repeatedly bullied the Chief Executive (CEO) who endeavoured to implement best practice in governance matters rather than succumb to lobbying. The CEO was criticised unfairly, shouted at and humiliated in front of other members of staff. The stress caused a breakdown and the CEO took prolonged sick leave. The organisation lost a vital grant causing financial problems. The CEO left and the serial bullies moved on to pick on fellow trustees. Two trustees also left the organisation. This ‘pair bullying’² was born of a desire for power in the boardroom, which was gained at the expense of the health of a senior, professional manager and the loss of two talented board members, who were also founder trustees and, ironically, had been close friends of the bullies.

We cannot afford this behaviour in the arts sector – in any sense of the word. To overcome bullying in the arts workplace, arts organisations must ensure there are suitable policies in place and that these are being implemented effectively; encourage arts line managers to access appropriate training; and keep senior staff and governors informed of their responsibility to safeguard dignity at work. Apart from the human cost, bullying has huge financial implications. It can make employees’ lives a misery, affect their performance and damage their careers. It can also have a serious impact on organisations: statistics show that each year as many as 18.9 million working days are lost to bullying and, according to the Andrea Adams Trust (see box), up to a half of all stress-related illnesses are a direct result of bullying.